The battle's done, and we kind of won, so we sound our victory cheer: where do we go from here?
... a blog by Marc Lynch

March 10, 2005

Jordan: Pressure on the Press

Al Hayat reports today that the Jordanian government has been clamping down hard on the press recently. The article begins by quoting a Jordanian journalist: "the government is exerting in recent days unprecedented pressure on the daily press to prevent them from publishing news and advertisements and opinion articles concerning the escalating crisis between the authorities and the professional associations."

According to al Hayat, the government barred the daily newspapers from publishing several advertisements purchased by supporters of the associations, which called on King Abdullah to intervene against the draft law. An unnamed journalist described this as "a retreat from democracy and an unjustified intervention in the institutions of civil society."

According to that source, the government also barred the newspapers from publishing the names of the 59 members of Parliament who had signed the initial memorandum to the government demanding that the draft law be withdrawn until there could be further consultations with the associations. As I mentioned yesterday, the official Jordanian news agency Petra reported that "less than 40" deputies signed the letter.

Usama Rantissi, one of the few journalists quoted by name, told al Hayat that "the government pressured the daily newspapers forcefully to bar news about the crisis with the associations", and warned that this was one more indication of the government's move back to prior censorship and a martial law mentality. An editor of one of the daily papers, on the condition of anonymity, agreed that these interventions constituted censorship and a major obstacle for the press, and were mostly unjustified. Taher al Udwan, editor of al Arab al Yom, agreed, on the record. Another unidentified journalist said that "Jordan is now devoid of any independent press." Ali Abu al Sakkar, an Islamist member of Parliament, said that the government interventions in the press did not surprise him, given the way that the government has behaved across the board, including "direct pressure on members of Parliament to withdraw their signatures from the memorandum requesting the withdrawal of the draft law."

Government officials denied any intervention in the press, and Tareq al Moumni, head of the Journalists Association, told al Hayat that prior censorship was a thing of the past.

This is an important story, not just for Jordanian politics but for the entire grand narrative of Bush's march to Arab freedom. King Abdullah is coming to Washington on Monday. Jordan is almost completely dependent on American support. What is America's move? Sit back and let the Jordanian government eviscerate civil society and intimidate the press and Parliament on the grounds that it's an internal affair, and the associations trend anti-American and anti-Israeli anyway? Or stand on principle and insist that American allies need to get on the democracy bandwagon if they want to remain American allies? It's Bush's call.

Trust me, Arabs are paying attention, even if Americans are not (according to Google News, there hasn't been a single story on this in the mainstream American media to this point; nor has Jordan come up in any recent State Department daily press briefing).

Al Hayat reports today that the Jordanian government has been clamping down hard on the press recently. The article begins by quoting a Jordanian journalist: "the government is exerting in recent days unprecedented pressure on the daily press to prevent them from publishing news and advertisements and opinion articles concerning the escalating crisis between the authorities and the professional associations."

According to al Hayat, the government barred the daily newspapers from publishing several advertisements purchased by supporters of the associations, which called on King Abdullah to intervene against the draft law. An unnamed journalist described this as "a retreat from democracy and an unjustified intervention in the institutions of civil society."

According to that source, the government also barred the newspapers from publishing the names of the 59 members of Parliament who had signed the initial memorandum to the government demanding that the draft law be withdrawn until there could be further consultations with the associations. As I mentioned yesterday, the official Jordanian news agency Petra reported that "less than 40" deputies signed the letter.

Usama Rantissi, one of the few journalists quoted by name, told al Hayat that "the government pressured the daily newspapers forcefully to bar news about the crisis with the associations", and warned that this was one more indication of the government's move back to prior censorship and a martial law mentality. An editor of one of the daily papers, on the condition of anonymity, agreed that these interventions constituted censorship and a major obstacle for the press, and were mostly unjustified. Taher al Udwan, editor of al Arab al Yom, agreed, on the record. Another unidentified journalist said that "Jordan is now devoid of any independent press." Ali Abu al Sakkar, an Islamist member of Parliament, said that the government interventions in the press did not surprise him, given the way that the government has behaved across the board, including "direct pressure on members of Parliament to withdraw their signatures from the memorandum requesting the withdrawal of the draft law."

Government officials denied any intervention in the press, and Tareq al Moumni, head of the Journalists Association, told al Hayat that prior censorship was a thing of the past.

This is an important story, not just for Jordanian politics but for the entire grand narrative of Bush's march to Arab freedom. King Abdullah is coming to Washington on Monday. Jordan is almost completely dependent on American support. What is America's move? Sit back and let the Jordanian government eviscerate civil society and intimidate the press and Parliament on the grounds that it's an internal affair, and the associations trend anti-American and anti-Israeli anyway? Or stand on principle and insist that American allies need to get on the democracy bandwagon if they want to remain American allies? It's Bush's call.

Trust me, Arabs are paying attention, even if Americans are not (according to Google News, there hasn't been a single story on this in the mainstream American media to this point; nor has Jordan come up in any recent State Department daily press briefing).

UPDATE: according to the Jordan Times, the Parliament has put off discussion of the draft law for three days, citing constitutional provisions requiring adequate time for deputies to read and consider proposed bills. This means that the law - which the government wanted considered "urgently" on Sunday, i.e. before Abdullah's visit to Washington - will now be discussed after his meeting with Bush. Let's hope that Bush takes advantage of this opportunity.

Comments

There is no "march to freedom" in Arab and Muslim countries. Bush and his disciples may say and believe what they like, the fact is that the Bush administration is supporting oppressive regimes, who will not benefit from any "march to freedom".

American interventionist foreign policy has strengthened the Islamists. Any free election in Muslim countries will strengthen them. Just look at the recent elections in Turkey, Pakistan and Iraq for example.

i agree with Faisal's points, and want to add my own talking point here:

i find that Bush and his neocons are being used as a convenient 'bogeyman' for the Syrians, among others, to rail against. while here in the US, politicians have traditionaly used 'communism' and lately 'terrorism' to rally supporters and frighten dissenters, Bush and the neocons have lately replaced the Israelis as the agent du jour of hate and fear in the ME.

what i mean by this is that the supporters of the Syrian regime have all (predictably) tried to quell the 'problem' of the Lebanese opposition, by portraying them as being stooges or puppets of Bush and his neocons--while there is plenty of good reason to dislike the American govt, due to its years of meddling in the region, too often this boogeyman is co-opted by any strongman looking to preserve his ME fiefdom--after all, there seems to be plenty of prevailing 'wisdom' in the region of 'well, at least an Arab dictator is better than an American one (a trick question: one does not choose a dictator, the dictator chooses YOU)

in other words, it's important for the people of Lebanon and Syria to recognize this: there are many, many people in the US (and the world) who want you to be free--i'm not talking about Bush's 'freedom' bs, but the freedom to be able to express yourself, without worrying about a knock on the door in the middle of the night, freedom to sell your goods without some corrupt govt official wetting his beak, and freedom to practice your own religious beliefs without being imposed on by others.

freedom is a universal ideal, not something that is owned by Bush and co, and there are many people here in the US who disagree with Bush's policies, but who firmly support the Lebanese independence!